He said, “We express grave concern as to the
cumulative effects of holding a criminal trial in camera and anonymising the
defendants. We find it difficult to conceive of a situation where both
departures from open justice will be justified.”

As
ever the justification for a secret trial has been that familiar catch all
“national security”.

In particular senior prosecutors claimed that the trial
was in danger of not getting underway if details were revealed.

That has
clearly not been the case. Such headlines as “Blairs may have been terror target”
have not stopped the prosecution.

In
the run-up to this trial, it has been described as unprecedented and unique.
Well, it is only unique until the next time.

In fact, a parallel secret legal
system has been growing up in this country over the last few years.

So-called
super injunctions have been a cause of much controversy, and they are not just
about the doings of celebrities, but also firms like Trafigura.

Liberty has
warned about the use of secret evidence in the Special Immigration Appeals
Commission, leaving people unable to defend themselves properly.

Above
all, the passing of the Justice and Security Act showed that the intention was not
for this case to be unique.

The coalition government actively intend secret
courts and the suppression of evidence through closed material procedures.

For
all that the Liberal Democrats have claimed to be a break on the Conservatives'
worst instincts, this is the reality that they have created, neither liberal
nor very democratic.

We
are now left with the bizarre situation in the Erol Incedal trial that the
secret part of proceedings can be attended by 10 journalists who will not be
permitted at this stage to report on the evidence that they hear.

This makes us look
ridiculous in the eyes of the world, and hands a get-out to dictators wanting
to muzzle the free press.

Surely, we need to be able to hear the evidence for
the very reasons of national security and our confidence that justice is being
carried out correctly.

Otherwise we are in danger that all the general public
comes away with is that this is just about somebody having a bit of paper with
Tony Blair's address on it.

The
secrecy does nothing to make us safer. Quite the reverse.

It allows conspiracy
theories to flourish, and raises the question of whether there are other
trials we do not know about. It acts as a recruiting sergeant for the very
people who wish us harm.

Of
course we want to get to the truth if someone was plotting a “Mumbai style”
attack on our streets. That is why we have courts, and that justice needs to be
seen to be done, not just pushed through without scrutiny.

As Reprieve's Clare
Algar put it, “To hold trials entirely in secret is an assault on the
fundamental principles of British justice”.

Even if we know some of the detail
of the Incedal case, this trial still leaves justice undermined.

This is a real
threat to the very British values that those who argue for the national
security state claim to uphold.